Expert testimony is required to establish the material risks of a medical procedure in an informed consent medical malpractice claim.
Continue reading ›Mark Kopec Now
Expert testimony is required to establish the material risks of a medical procedure in an informed consent medical malpractice claim.
Continue reading ›A medical malpractice expert using inference does not have to testify that the injury would not have happened in the absence of negligence.
Continue reading ›Medical Malpractice CQE. Report was valid. It provided some details as to the standard of care and how the defendant failed to meet it.
Continue reading ›A plaintiff who voluntarily dismisses a case for no report attached to CQE cannot use the savings provision in CJP 5-119 to re-file.
Continue reading ›Late expert designation was allowed where the plaintiff failed to initially disclose all prior medical providers.
Continue reading ›A nurse may sign a CQE on cause of pressure ulcers, provided the opinion consists of a nursing diagnosis and not medical causation.
Continue reading ›An ER doctor who does not testify what a surgeon would have done cannot give causation testimony that earlier surgery would have succeeded.
Continue reading ›The plaintiff in a medical malpractice case has the burden of establishing that their expert complies with the 20 Percent Rule.
Continue reading ›Plaintiffs’ experts in birth injury case had sufficient factual basis for their opinions on Betamethasone to defeat a Daubert challenge.
Continue reading ›A Daubert hearing focusing on medical studies should involve testimony by a REI expert, not just counsel arguments.
Continue reading ›